info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
It's treason, Jesus Fucking Christ!
47 views
Skip to first unread message
CtrlAltDel
Jan 12, 2017, 1:59:49 AM1/12/17
to
https://is.gd/lOAumr
The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims,
as Democrats Cheer
Glenn Greenwald
2017-01-11T14:35:34+00:00
In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after
serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn
Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of
government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted
influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will
persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of
the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11
era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even
further.
This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly
elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They
are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of
what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”
Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which
reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence
officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and
traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party,
seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day,
are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with
any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those
behaviors might be.
The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest.
There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting
those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional
legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil
disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves
effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.
But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert
the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected
president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very
entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic
deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind.
Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated
as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to
propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic
human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse
to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally
bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.
Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for
him than attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting
large media outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose actual
Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to believe the people and
institutions who have demonstrated they are willing to endorse any
assertions no matter how factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic
tactic no matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of ensuring
accuracy?
All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep
State unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump:
vesting credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a
completely unvetted and unverified document, compiled by a paid, anonymous
operative while he was working for both GOP and Democratic opponents of
Trump, accusing Trump of a wide range of crimes, corrupt acts and
salacious private conduct. The reaction to all of this illustrates that
while the Trump presidency poses grave dangers, so, too, do those who are
increasingly unhinged in their flailing, slapdash, and destructive
attempts to undermine it.
For months, the CIA, with unprecedented clarity, overtly threw its weight
behind Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to defeat Donald Trump. In
August, former acting CIA Director Michael Morell announced his
endorsement of Clinton in the New York Times and claimed that “Mr. Putin
had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”
The CIA and NSA director under George W. Bush, Gen. Michael Hayden, also
endorsed Clinton, and went to the Washington Post to warn, in the week
before the election, that “Donald Trump really does sound a lot like
Vladimir Putin,” adding that Trump is “the useful fool, some naif,
manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support
is happily accepted and exploited.”
It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton over Trump.
Clinton was critical of Obama for restraining the CIA’s proxy war in Syria
and was eager to expand that war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton
clearly wanted a harder line than Obama took against the CIA’s long-
standing foes in Moscow, while Trump wanted improved relations and greater
cooperation. In general, Clinton defended and intended to extend the
decadeslong international military order on which the CIA and Pentagon’s
preeminence depends, while Trump — through a still-uncertain mix of
instability and extremist conviction — posed a threat to it.
Whatever one’s views are on those debates, it is the democratic framework
— the presidential election, the confirmation process, congressional
leaders, judicial proceedings, citizen activism and protest, civil
disobedience — that should determine how they are resolved. All of those
policy disputes were debated out in the open; the public heard them; and
Trump won. Nobody should crave the rule of Deep State overlords.
Yet craving Deep State rule is exactly what prominent Democratic
operatives and media figures are doing. Any doubt about that is now
dispelled. Just last week, Chuck Schumer issued a warning to Trump,
telling Rachel Maddow that Trump was being “really dumb” by challenging
the unelected intelligence community because of all the ways they possess
to destroy those who dare to stand up to them:
Chuck Schumer on Trump's tweet hitting intel community: "He's being
really dumb to do this." https://t.co/MOcU8ruOPK
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 4, 2017
And last night, many Democrats openly embraced and celebrated what was, so
plainly, an attempt by the Deep State to sabotage an elected official who
had defied it: ironically, its own form of blackmail.
Back in October, a political operative and former employee of the British
intelligence agency MI6 was being paid by Democrats to dig up dirt on
Trump (before that, he was paid by anti-Trump Republicans). He tried to
convince countless media outlets to publish a long memo he had written
filled with explosive accusations about Trump’s treason, business
corruption and sexual escapades, with the overarching theme that Trump was
in servitude to Moscow because they were blackmailing and bribing him.
Despite how many had it, no media outlets published it. That was because
these were anonymous claims unaccompanied by any evidence at all, and even
in this more permissive new media environment, nobody was willing to be
journalistically associated with it. As the New York Times’ Executive
Editor Dean Baquet put it last night, he would not publish these “totally
unsubstantiated” allegations because “we, like others, investigated the
allegations and haven’t corroborated them, and we felt we’re not in the
business of publishing things we can’t stand by.”
The closest this operative got to success was convincing Mother Jones’s
David Corn to publish an October 31 article reporting that “a former
senior intelligence officer for a Western country” claims that “he
provided the [FBI] with memos, based on his recent interactions with
Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to
co-opt and assist Trump.”
But because this was just an anonymous claim unaccompanied by any evidence
or any specifics (which Corn withheld), it made very little impact. All of
that changed yesterday. Why?
What changed was the intelligence community’s resolution to cause this all
to become public and to be viewed as credible. In December, John McCain
provided a copy of this report to the FBI and demanded they take it
seriously.
At some point last week, the chiefs of the intelligence agencies decided
to declare that this ex-British intelligence operative was “credible”
enough that his allegations warranted briefing both Trump and Obama about
them, thus stamping some sort of vague, indirect, and deniable official
approval on these accusations. Someone — by all appearances, numerous
officials — then went to CNN to tell them they had done this, causing CNN
to go on-air and, in the gravest of tones, announce the “Breaking News”
that “the nation’s top intelligence officials” briefed Obama and Trump
that Russia had compiled information that “compromised President-elect
Trump.”
CNN refused to specify what these allegations were on the ground that they
could not “verify” them. But with this document in the hands of multiple
media outlets, it was only a matter of time — a small amount of time —
before someone would step up and publish the whole thing. Buzzfeed quickly
obliged, airing all of the unvetted, anonymous claims about Trump.
Its editor-in-chief Ben Smith published a memo explaining that decision,
saying that—- although there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations”
— Buzzfeed in general “errs on the side of publication” and “Americans can
make up their own minds about the allegations.” Publishing this document
predictably produced massive traffic (and thus profit) for the site, with
millions of people viewing the article and presumably reading the
“dossier.”
One can certainly object to Buzzfeed’s decision and, as the New York Times
notes this morning, many journalists are doing so. It’s almost impossible
to imagine a scenario where it’s justifiable for a news outlet to publish
a totally anonymous, unverified, unvetted document filled with scurrilous
and inflammatory allegations about which its own editor-in-chief says
there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations,” on the ground that
they want to leave it to the public to decide whether to believe it.
But even if one believes there is no such case where that is justified,
yesterday’s circumstances presented the most compelling scenario possible
for doing this. Once CNN strongly hinted at these allegations, it left it
to the public imagination to conjure up the dirt Russia allegedly had to
blackmail and control Trump. By publishing these accusations, BuzzFeed
ended that speculation. More importantly, it allowed everyone to see how
dubious this document is, one the CIA and CNN had elevated into some sort
of grave national security threat.
Almost immediately after it was published, the farcical nature of the
“dossier” manifested. Not only was its author anonymous, but he was paid
by Democrats (and, before that, by Trump’s GOP adversaries) to dig up dirt
on Trump. Worse, he himself cited no evidence of any kind, but instead
relied on a string of other anonymous people in Russia he claims told him
these things. Worse still, the document was filled with amateur errors.
While many of the claims are inherently unverified, some can be confirmed.
One such claim — that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen secretly traveled to
Prague in August to meet with Russian officials — was strongly denied by
Cohen, who insisted he had never been to Prague in his life (Prague is the
same place that foreign intelligence officials claimed, in 2001, was the
site of a nonexistent meeting between Iraqi officials and 9/11 hijackers,
which contributed to 70% of Americans believing, as late as the fall of
2003, that Saddam personally planned the 9/11 attack). This morning, the
Wall Street Journal reported that “the FBI has found no evidence that
[Cohen] traveled to the Czech Republic.”
None of this stopped Democratic operatives and prominent media figures
from treating these totally unverified and unvetted allegations as grave
revelations. From Vox’s Zach Beauchamp:
Good god pic.twitter.com/BiGqkiobA1
— Zack Beauchamp (@zackbeauchamp) January 10, 2017
Look, don't take anything in this dossier as gospel. But it's
definitely evidence in favor of some pretty extraordinary claims.
— Zack Beauchamp (@zackbeauchamp) January 10, 2017
BuzzFeed’s Borzou Daraghai posted a long series of tweets discussing the
profound consequences of these revelations, only occasionally remembering
to insert the rather important journalistic caveat “if true” in his
meditations:
Whoa ????. So guessing the press conference tomorrow is off. https://
t.co/e4iNrNKgrh pic.twitter.com/VEa44PeICe
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
Stunning and believable narrative in leaked docs describing alleged
rift in Kremlin over meddling in US elections https://t.co/e4iNrNKgrh
pic.twitter.com/qY2TuSM5Fc
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
According to raw intel file, Kremlin info ops regarded Trump,
@DrJillStein, LaRouche and @GenFlynn all potential assets in war vs
Clinton pic.twitter.com/3fxTcqUIUL
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
Bombshell if true: Trump lawyer @MichaelCohen212 & Kremlin reps
allegedly held clandestine August meeting in Prague https://t.co/
e4iNrO1RiP pic.twitter.com/7FBZjJyXMq
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
Meanwhile, liberal commentator Rebecca Solnit declared this to be a
“smoking gun” that proves Trump’s “treason,” while Daily Kos’ Markos
Moulitsas sounded the same theme:
With CNN confirming that intelligence chiefs consider this report
credible, it's about time to start using the word "treason"
— Markos Moulitsas (@markos) January 11, 2017
While some Democrats sounded notes of caution — party loyalist Josh
Marshall commendably urged: “I would say in reviewing raw, extremely raw
‘intel’, people shld retain their skepticism even if they rightly think
Trump is the worst” — the overwhelming reaction was the same as all the
other instances where the CIA and its allies released unverified claims
about Trump and Russia: instant embrace of the evidence-free assertions as
Truth, combined with proclamations that it demonstrated Trump’s status as
a traitor (with anyone expressing skepticism designated a Kremlin agent or
stooge).
There is a real danger here that this maneuver can harshly backfire, to
the great benefit of Trump and to the great detriment of those who want to
oppose him. If any of the significant claims in this “dossier” turn out to
be provably false — such as Cohen’s trip to Prague — many people will
conclude, with Trump’s encouragement, that large media outlets (CNN and
BuzzFeed) and anti-Trump factions inside the government (CIA) are
deploying “Fake News” to destroy him. In the eyes of many people, that
will forever discredit — render impotent — future journalistic exposés
that are based on actual, corroborated wrongdoing.
Beyond that, the threat posed by submitting ourselves to the CIA and
empowering it to reign supreme outside of the democratic process is — as
Eisenhower warned — an even more severe danger. The threat of being ruled
by unaccountable and unelected entities is self-evident and grave. That’s
especially true when the entity behind which so many are rallying is one
with a long and deliberate history of lying, propaganda, war crimes,
torture, and the worst atrocities imaginable.
All of the claims about Russia’s interference in U.S. elections and ties
to Trump should be fully investigated by a credible body, and the evidence
publicly disclosed to the fullest extent possible. As my colleague Sam
Biddle argued last week after disclosure of the farcical intelligence
community report on Russia hacking — one which even Putin’s foes mocked as
a bad joke — the utter lack of evidence for these allegations means “we
need an independent, resolute inquiry.” But until then, assertions that
are unaccompanied by evidence and disseminated anonymously should be
treated with the utmost skepticism — not lavished with convenience-driven
gullibility.
Most important of all, the legitimate and effective tactics for opposing
Trump are being utterly drowned by these irrational, desperate, ad hoc
crusades that have no cogent strategy and make his opponents appear
increasingly devoid of reason and gravity. Right now, Trump’s opponents
are behaving as media critic Adam Johnson described: as ideological jelly
fish, floating around aimlessly and lost, desperately latching on to
whatever barge randomly passes by.
There are solutions to Trump. They involve reasoned strategizing and
patient focus on issues people actually care about. Whatever those
solutions are, venerating the intelligence community, begging for its
intervention, and equating their dark and dirty assertions as Truth are
most certainly not among them. Doing that cannot possibly achieve any
good, and is already doing much harm.
The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims,
as Democrats Cheer
Glenn Greenwald
2017-01-11T14:35:34+00:00
In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after
serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn
Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of
government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted
influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will
persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of
the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11
era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even
further.
This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly
elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They
are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of
what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”
Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which
reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence
officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and
traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party,
seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day,
are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with
any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those
behaviors might be.
The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest.
There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting
those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional
legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil
disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves
effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.
But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert
the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected
president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very
entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic
deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind.
Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated
as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to
propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic
human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse
to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally
bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.
Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for
him than attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting
large media outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose actual
Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to believe the people and
institutions who have demonstrated they are willing to endorse any
assertions no matter how factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic
tactic no matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of ensuring
accuracy?
All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep
State unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump:
vesting credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a
completely unvetted and unverified document, compiled by a paid, anonymous
operative while he was working for both GOP and Democratic opponents of
Trump, accusing Trump of a wide range of crimes, corrupt acts and
salacious private conduct. The reaction to all of this illustrates that
while the Trump presidency poses grave dangers, so, too, do those who are
increasingly unhinged in their flailing, slapdash, and destructive
attempts to undermine it.
For months, the CIA, with unprecedented clarity, overtly threw its weight
behind Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to defeat Donald Trump. In
August, former acting CIA Director Michael Morell announced his
endorsement of Clinton in the New York Times and claimed that “Mr. Putin
had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”
The CIA and NSA director under George W. Bush, Gen. Michael Hayden, also
endorsed Clinton, and went to the Washington Post to warn, in the week
before the election, that “Donald Trump really does sound a lot like
Vladimir Putin,” adding that Trump is “the useful fool, some naif,
manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support
is happily accepted and exploited.”
It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton over Trump.
Clinton was critical of Obama for restraining the CIA’s proxy war in Syria
and was eager to expand that war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton
clearly wanted a harder line than Obama took against the CIA’s long-
standing foes in Moscow, while Trump wanted improved relations and greater
cooperation. In general, Clinton defended and intended to extend the
decadeslong international military order on which the CIA and Pentagon’s
preeminence depends, while Trump — through a still-uncertain mix of
instability and extremist conviction — posed a threat to it.
Whatever one’s views are on those debates, it is the democratic framework
— the presidential election, the confirmation process, congressional
leaders, judicial proceedings, citizen activism and protest, civil
disobedience — that should determine how they are resolved. All of those
policy disputes were debated out in the open; the public heard them; and
Trump won. Nobody should crave the rule of Deep State overlords.
Yet craving Deep State rule is exactly what prominent Democratic
operatives and media figures are doing. Any doubt about that is now
dispelled. Just last week, Chuck Schumer issued a warning to Trump,
telling Rachel Maddow that Trump was being “really dumb” by challenging
the unelected intelligence community because of all the ways they possess
to destroy those who dare to stand up to them:
Chuck Schumer on Trump's tweet hitting intel community: "He's being
really dumb to do this." https://t.co/MOcU8ruOPK
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 4, 2017
And last night, many Democrats openly embraced and celebrated what was, so
plainly, an attempt by the Deep State to sabotage an elected official who
had defied it: ironically, its own form of blackmail.
Back in October, a political operative and former employee of the British
intelligence agency MI6 was being paid by Democrats to dig up dirt on
Trump (before that, he was paid by anti-Trump Republicans). He tried to
convince countless media outlets to publish a long memo he had written
filled with explosive accusations about Trump’s treason, business
corruption and sexual escapades, with the overarching theme that Trump was
in servitude to Moscow because they were blackmailing and bribing him.
Despite how many had it, no media outlets published it. That was because
these were anonymous claims unaccompanied by any evidence at all, and even
in this more permissive new media environment, nobody was willing to be
journalistically associated with it. As the New York Times’ Executive
Editor Dean Baquet put it last night, he would not publish these “totally
unsubstantiated” allegations because “we, like others, investigated the
allegations and haven’t corroborated them, and we felt we’re not in the
business of publishing things we can’t stand by.”
The closest this operative got to success was convincing Mother Jones’s
David Corn to publish an October 31 article reporting that “a former
senior intelligence officer for a Western country” claims that “he
provided the [FBI] with memos, based on his recent interactions with
Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to
co-opt and assist Trump.”
But because this was just an anonymous claim unaccompanied by any evidence
or any specifics (which Corn withheld), it made very little impact. All of
that changed yesterday. Why?
What changed was the intelligence community’s resolution to cause this all
to become public and to be viewed as credible. In December, John McCain
provided a copy of this report to the FBI and demanded they take it
seriously.
At some point last week, the chiefs of the intelligence agencies decided
to declare that this ex-British intelligence operative was “credible”
enough that his allegations warranted briefing both Trump and Obama about
them, thus stamping some sort of vague, indirect, and deniable official
approval on these accusations. Someone — by all appearances, numerous
officials — then went to CNN to tell them they had done this, causing CNN
to go on-air and, in the gravest of tones, announce the “Breaking News”
that “the nation’s top intelligence officials” briefed Obama and Trump
that Russia had compiled information that “compromised President-elect
Trump.”
CNN refused to specify what these allegations were on the ground that they
could not “verify” them. But with this document in the hands of multiple
media outlets, it was only a matter of time — a small amount of time —
before someone would step up and publish the whole thing. Buzzfeed quickly
obliged, airing all of the unvetted, anonymous claims about Trump.
Its editor-in-chief Ben Smith published a memo explaining that decision,
saying that—- although there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations”
— Buzzfeed in general “errs on the side of publication” and “Americans can
make up their own minds about the allegations.” Publishing this document
predictably produced massive traffic (and thus profit) for the site, with
millions of people viewing the article and presumably reading the
“dossier.”
One can certainly object to Buzzfeed’s decision and, as the New York Times
notes this morning, many journalists are doing so. It’s almost impossible
to imagine a scenario where it’s justifiable for a news outlet to publish
a totally anonymous, unverified, unvetted document filled with scurrilous
and inflammatory allegations about which its own editor-in-chief says
there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations,” on the ground that
they want to leave it to the public to decide whether to believe it.
But even if one believes there is no such case where that is justified,
yesterday’s circumstances presented the most compelling scenario possible
for doing this. Once CNN strongly hinted at these allegations, it left it
to the public imagination to conjure up the dirt Russia allegedly had to
blackmail and control Trump. By publishing these accusations, BuzzFeed
ended that speculation. More importantly, it allowed everyone to see how
dubious this document is, one the CIA and CNN had elevated into some sort
of grave national security threat.
Almost immediately after it was published, the farcical nature of the
“dossier” manifested. Not only was its author anonymous, but he was paid
by Democrats (and, before that, by Trump’s GOP adversaries) to dig up dirt
on Trump. Worse, he himself cited no evidence of any kind, but instead
relied on a string of other anonymous people in Russia he claims told him
these things. Worse still, the document was filled with amateur errors.
While many of the claims are inherently unverified, some can be confirmed.
One such claim — that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen secretly traveled to
Prague in August to meet with Russian officials — was strongly denied by
Cohen, who insisted he had never been to Prague in his life (Prague is the
same place that foreign intelligence officials claimed, in 2001, was the
site of a nonexistent meeting between Iraqi officials and 9/11 hijackers,
which contributed to 70% of Americans believing, as late as the fall of
2003, that Saddam personally planned the 9/11 attack). This morning, the
Wall Street Journal reported that “the FBI has found no evidence that
[Cohen] traveled to the Czech Republic.”
None of this stopped Democratic operatives and prominent media figures
from treating these totally unverified and unvetted allegations as grave
revelations. From Vox’s Zach Beauchamp:
Good god pic.twitter.com/BiGqkiobA1
— Zack Beauchamp (@zackbeauchamp) January 10, 2017
Look, don't take anything in this dossier as gospel. But it's
definitely evidence in favor of some pretty extraordinary claims.
— Zack Beauchamp (@zackbeauchamp) January 10, 2017
BuzzFeed’s Borzou Daraghai posted a long series of tweets discussing the
profound consequences of these revelations, only occasionally remembering
to insert the rather important journalistic caveat “if true” in his
meditations:
Whoa ????. So guessing the press conference tomorrow is off. https://
t.co/e4iNrNKgrh pic.twitter.com/VEa44PeICe
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
Stunning and believable narrative in leaked docs describing alleged
rift in Kremlin over meddling in US elections https://t.co/e4iNrNKgrh
pic.twitter.com/qY2TuSM5Fc
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
According to raw intel file, Kremlin info ops regarded Trump,
@DrJillStein, LaRouche and @GenFlynn all potential assets in war vs
Clinton pic.twitter.com/3fxTcqUIUL
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
Bombshell if true: Trump lawyer @MichaelCohen212 & Kremlin reps
allegedly held clandestine August meeting in Prague https://t.co/
e4iNrO1RiP pic.twitter.com/7FBZjJyXMq
— Borzou Daragahi (@borzou) January 11, 2017
Meanwhile, liberal commentator Rebecca Solnit declared this to be a
“smoking gun” that proves Trump’s “treason,” while Daily Kos’ Markos
Moulitsas sounded the same theme:
With CNN confirming that intelligence chiefs consider this report
credible, it's about time to start using the word "treason"
— Markos Moulitsas (@markos) January 11, 2017
While some Democrats sounded notes of caution — party loyalist Josh
Marshall commendably urged: “I would say in reviewing raw, extremely raw
‘intel’, people shld retain their skepticism even if they rightly think
Trump is the worst” — the overwhelming reaction was the same as all the
other instances where the CIA and its allies released unverified claims
about Trump and Russia: instant embrace of the evidence-free assertions as
Truth, combined with proclamations that it demonstrated Trump’s status as
a traitor (with anyone expressing skepticism designated a Kremlin agent or
stooge).
There is a real danger here that this maneuver can harshly backfire, to
the great benefit of Trump and to the great detriment of those who want to
oppose him. If any of the significant claims in this “dossier” turn out to
be provably false — such as Cohen’s trip to Prague — many people will
conclude, with Trump’s encouragement, that large media outlets (CNN and
BuzzFeed) and anti-Trump factions inside the government (CIA) are
deploying “Fake News” to destroy him. In the eyes of many people, that
will forever discredit — render impotent — future journalistic exposés
that are based on actual, corroborated wrongdoing.
Beyond that, the threat posed by submitting ourselves to the CIA and
empowering it to reign supreme outside of the democratic process is — as
Eisenhower warned — an even more severe danger. The threat of being ruled
by unaccountable and unelected entities is self-evident and grave. That’s
especially true when the entity behind which so many are rallying is one
with a long and deliberate history of lying, propaganda, war crimes,
torture, and the worst atrocities imaginable.
All of the claims about Russia’s interference in U.S. elections and ties
to Trump should be fully investigated by a credible body, and the evidence
publicly disclosed to the fullest extent possible. As my colleague Sam
Biddle argued last week after disclosure of the farcical intelligence
community report on Russia hacking — one which even Putin’s foes mocked as
a bad joke — the utter lack of evidence for these allegations means “we
need an independent, resolute inquiry.” But until then, assertions that
are unaccompanied by evidence and disseminated anonymously should be
treated with the utmost skepticism — not lavished with convenience-driven
gullibility.
Most important of all, the legitimate and effective tactics for opposing
Trump are being utterly drowned by these irrational, desperate, ad hoc
crusades that have no cogent strategy and make his opponents appear
increasingly devoid of reason and gravity. Right now, Trump’s opponents
are behaving as media critic Adam Johnson described: as ideological jelly
fish, floating around aimlessly and lost, desperately latching on to
whatever barge randomly passes by.
There are solutions to Trump. They involve reasoned strategizing and
patient focus on issues people actually care about. Whatever those
solutions are, venerating the intelligence community, begging for its
intervention, and equating their dark and dirty assertions as Truth are
most certainly not among them. Doing that cannot possibly achieve any
good, and is already doing much harm.
unclejr
Jan 12, 2017, 11:12:38 AM1/12/17
to
I'm glad that your over Monday's loss. Cheers!
Eric Ramon
Jan 12, 2017, 7:01:44 PM1/12/17
to
On Thursday, January 12, 2017 at 8:12:38 AM UTC-8, unclejr wrote:
>
> Didn't read.
you probably should. At least skim it. Greenwald has been consistently one of the best.
>
> Didn't read.
you probably should. At least skim it. Greenwald has been consistently one of the best.
shiite
Jan 13, 2017, 8:45:09 AM1/13/17
to
On Thursday, January 12, 2017 at 12:59:49 AM UTC-6, CtrlAltDel wrote:
RoddyMcCorley
Jan 13, 2017, 12:35:06 PM1/13/17
to
On 1/12/2017 1:59 AM, CtrlAltDel wrote:
> https://is.gd/lOAumr
>
> The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims,
> as Democrats Cheer
> Glenn Greenwald
> 2017-01-11T14:35:34+00:00
>
> In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after
> serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn
> Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of
> government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted
> influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
> The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will
> persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of
> the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11
> era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even
> further.
>
Didn't I tell you to stay away from the KoolAid?
> https://is.gd/lOAumr
>
> The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims,
> as Democrats Cheer
> Glenn Greenwald
> 2017-01-11T14:35:34+00:00
>
> In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after
> serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn
> Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of
> government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted
> influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
> The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will
> persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of
> the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11
> era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even
> further.
>
A simple case of intellectual blindness.
--
False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul
with evil.
Pennsylvania - Tá sé difriúil anseo.
0 new messages